What's so interesting is this: the debate over banning or divesting from TikTok. You've written extensively about the legal issues, particularly highlighting two key sentences in the briefing to the DC Circuit that you felt cast doubt on

the national security arguments. Didn't you just go through them for us? Sure. Some key issues revolve around whether a national security risk from the app actually exists. The government claims the risk is that the Chinese government might manipulate the app to spread propaganda or surveil Americans.

To mitigate this, the US government has negotiated with TikTok for years to store data within Texas and implement data controls. However, the US government remains dissatisfied with the level of protection, despite stating it has no information indicating Chinese government manipulation

of the app.  So it's all speculative. That's the government's difficulty. But is potential and speculation enough to justify protecting citizens?  Exactly. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals believed

the government was uncomfortable; it distrusted ByteDance and TikTok, and therefore could ban it from the country.  So, the question now before the Supreme Court is

The United States Supreme Court should take the case. Can you give us context or examples in the past where we've really seen court sides with a government in this way around national security, that even though it is theoretical in nature, it's important enough to overcome any rights

to free speech? So this is a very unusual case. There's nothing that is on all fours with this case. The closest case involving foreign propaganda in the United States is a case from the 1960s involving literally Chinese Communist propaganda. And the Supreme Court unanimously in that case said Americans

have a right to receive Chinese Communist propaganda if they so want. So there's not an ideal case, I think, of cases around national security, like the Pentagon Papers case where the US government said it's too dangerous for the New York Times to reveal the secret history of the Vietnam

War. And the Supreme Court said, actually, no, we don't believe that. It's not a kind of immediate risk that you are pointing to. And that's what TikTok's argument is going to be to the Supreme Court.

Do you think that that argument will carry weight if indeed it does get to the level of the Supreme Court? Well, if it goes to the Supreme Court, I think the same question is going to be before those judges as was before the D.C. Circuit.

Do you defer to the judgment of the political branches of Congress and the president when they insist that there is a national security risk and there's no other way to protect Americans than to ban the app? What's so interesting is it feels as though perhaps the

Worries coming from the user base have diminished significantly. And as we're just saying, only a third of US users, or the US population, supports such a ban. So is there context as to how that might need to change? I mean, you're no marketing expert, but it almost feels

as though the government needs to go out and make its case a little louder. The government tried to make its case for the last six months. So the ban has been in place, has been, you know, the law has been in place threatening this ban

since April. And so since that time, we've seen the government say that China controls this app and therefore it's unsafe. But Americans have continued using the app. So they, you know, Americans have decided that they don't feel unsafe despite the government's views.

In fact, Donald Trump started using the app. In fact, Joe Biden started using the app. Kamala Harris started using the app. Every politician is now using the app despite the fact that it's apparently, you know, possibly prone to foreign

manipulation, though the government again has said we have no evidence of that thus far.  January 19th. Therefore, it gets banned. It has to be sold before seeing that being the outcome here. I think that's becoming closer and closer to the likely

outcome that TikTok goes dark on January 19th.

TikTok Seeks to Pause US Ban Pending SCOTUS Review

Welcome to the Bloomberg Technology YouTube channel. Subscribe for original series and mini-docs on game-changing technologies, profiles on innovators, live conversations with experts, and breaking technology news & analysis from Bloomberg TV.

Bloomberg Technology

법적 문제를 중심으로 틱톡의 사용 금지 또는 탈퇴를 둘러싼 논쟁이 벌어지고 있습니다.

주요 쟁점은 앱의 국가 안보 위험 존재 여부와 관련된 것으로, 정부는 중국의 선전 또는 감시를 위한 조작 가능성이 있다고 주장하고 있습니다.

미국 정부는 데이터 저장 및 통제에 대해 협상했지만, 중국의 조작 증거가 부족하다는 이유로 여전히 불만족스러워하고 있습니다.

DC 순회 법원은 바이트댄스와 틱톡에 대한 정부의 불신이 금지 조치를 정당화한다고 판단했습니다.

금지 조치가 허용되는지 여부는 대법원에서 결정합니다.

이 사건에 대한 직접적인 법적 판례는 없으며, 가장 가까운 예로는 1960년대 중국 공산당 선전물이 있으며, 대법원은 이 선전물의 수신권을 지지했습니다.

대법원이 정부의 즉각적인 위험 주장을 기각한 펜타곤 페이퍼스 사건은 대조적인 사례로 꼽힙니다.

틱톡의 주장은 즉각적인 위험이 없다는 점에 초점을 맞추고 있습니다.

연방대법원은 DC 순회 재판부와 같은 질문, 즉 정부의 우려가 금지 조치를 정당화할 수 있는지 여부를 고려할 가능성이 높습니다.

미국 인구의 3분의 1만이 금지 조치를 지지하는 등 사용자층의 우려는 줄어들고 있습니다.

정부의 사건에 대한 커뮤니케이션은 개선이 필요할 수 있습니다.

중국의 통제와 안전하지 않다는 중국 정부의 주장에도 불구하고 정치인을 포함한 미국인들은 계속해서 이 앱을 사용하고 있습니다.

정부는 외국의 조작에 대한 증거가 부족합니다.

1월 19일 금지 조치와 그 이전에 TikTok이 매각될 가능성이 점점 더 커지고 있습니다.

틱톡은 1월 19일에 서비스가 종료될 수 있습니다.